Something just does not make sense about conspiracy theories involving hidden symbols

I would imagine it would be a pretty resourceful networking system in place for a Freemason to go out of town and hook up with other members in the local lodge. Surely you could find a directory or even a personal referral that would pave the way for you to meet other members about any place you go.

I also wouldn't expect the fraternity to need to recruit. I would think of it more like a personal invitation by friend or family, or even one's own desire to seek out the fraternity due to curiosity or something internal searching for the truth.

I am more of the mind to think the symbols exist to keep the memory of the underlying meaning alive and well in the minds of the masses. On some level we are interpeting what we see and even when unaware we are assimilating information. A repeated image would have more potential to effect the mind than a random one time image. Once the image is recorded in your mind it will begin to look for other things in your path that will help you to make meaning of it.

Originally posted by The Axeman

I'm unsure to whom you are referring, or if you are being facetious, or what.

I can't say 100% for certain, but it certainly seems that all that post here under the mantle of Freemason are genuine. There have been a few fakes on the boards over the years, but they are invariably called out and don't last long.

I do not doubt that most, if not all those who post here claiming to be masons are genuine. I am just poking fun at the idea that the masons who claim masonry is not sinister only do so because they are either part actively spreading misinformation or are lower level masons who are in the dark as to what the masons are *really* up to.

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
I do not doubt that most, if not all those who post here claiming to be masons are genuine. I am just poking fun at the idea that the masons who claim masonry is not sinister only do so because they are either part actively spreading misinformation or are lower level masons who are in the dark as to what the masons are *really* up to.

It is certainly a popular idea, at least in some circles.

I find it rather insulting for someone to tell me that I am too dense to know what it is that I'm doing, or what for. Call me sensitive, but I think someone telling me that I'm just a "low-level" Mason and that I am unknowingly worshipping the devil is on par with saying: "Hey, you know what? I think you are a complete and total moron, and you're going to hell because you're so stupid you can't tell good from bad. I'm better than you, nyah nyah."

It ruffles my feathers, what can I say? I'm not an idiot, and I know what I'm into, and it ain't what they think.

OK - I'm venting now... later.

reply to post by The Axeman


To be fair to those that say you and other "low level" masons have no idea that masonry is *really* up to no good, I do not believe that they are claiming that people like you are stupid, but rather they claim that people like you are simply not privy to information.

For example, I do not know your social security number. It is not because I am stupid, but rather it is because you conceal that number from almost everyone including myself.

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint


To be fair to those that say you and other "low level" masons have no idea that masonry is *really* up to no good, I do not believe that they are claiming that people like you are stupid, but rather they claim that people like you are simply not privy to information.

But certainly you can see the fallacy in their reasoning. While most Masons (especially those in the US) are computer illiterate and remain blissfully unaware that anti-Masonry even exists, those of us who surf the web are quite familiar with anti-Masonic claims. We have read the exact same material that the anti-Masons have. Plus, on top of it all, we also have personal experience in Freemasonry, (which they lack), and therefore have rejected their claims, knowing them to be nonsense.

Also, as a rule, anybody who talks about "low level Masons" demonstrates that he really doesn't know what he's talking about. In Masonry, there *are* no "low level Masons", as each brother is considered an equal. You will also find anti-Masons who believe that "lower level Masons" are those who have not been initiated into the Scottish Rite degrees. However, the Scottish Rite itself is subservient to the Grand Lodge in each state where it exists. The Grand Lodge is the Masonic government, and the only Masonic degree that a Grand Master, the highest ranking official, is required to hold is Master Mason (Third Degree). While he holds that office, he "outranks" all other Masons in the state, including 33° members of the Scottish Rite.

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
To be fair to those that say you and other "low level" masons have no idea that masonry is *really* up to no good, I do not believe that they are claiming that people like you are stupid, but rather they claim that people like you are simply not privy to information.

Well, that, and that we worship Satan without knowing it; or that we do our "Masters'" evil bidding without knowing it; or that we should actually fear for our lives due to the penalties of the obligations ( ); or that we worship the sun without knowing it; or that we have been "duped" into believing that the fraternity is good, when in "fact" it is a den of treachery and vice and we just can't see that due to being "brainwashed"; or any of a number of such ridiculous claims.

For example, I do not know your social security number. It is not because I am stupid, but rather it is because you conceal that number from almost everyone including myself.

Ok, but what we're talking about is the equivalent of someone telling me that I don't know my OWN social security number, even though I might have the card in my hand and be looking at said number as we speak.

Me: "Yes, I do know my social security number, I'm looking at it right now."

Them: "OK, well if you know it, then tell me what it is."

Me: "Get bent."

Them: "See! I TOLD you! You don't know it! You won't tell me, so you don't know your own SS number, HA HA! If you know it, why won't you tell me? Huh? Huh? Huh? Yeah, that's what I thought... you don't know it."

Me: "You, sir, are an idiot."

I can understand why so much focus has been put on the Masonic implications involving symbology. We all concede that symbols are widely used in their rituals and writings it seems.


But................ They simply aren't the originators or only users of symbols.

I think we are overly focusing on that angle and missing many other possiblilities. I could see why a higher operating system of secrecy could want to front out the Mason's so as to remain unnoticed in their own right.

Hopefully I'm not derailing the discussion here - but as a avid student in the Mystery Schools, I can attest to my own initiation through the symbolic avenue.

I can't say for sure where it started, but eventually I began to question why so many symbols were reoccuring everywhere I chanced to look.

In short, one thing led to another, I wound up at the infamous "it's all evil" conspiratorial websites and eventually fought through the propaganda enough to land here, where such matters can (usually) be debated openly and honestly.

But I will warn of one pitfall I found - just because one (or several) sites claim that an image has negative connotations in various myth and organizations, it doesn't mean that this is always the case.

The owl - wow. Great example for this. To the Greeks, it was a symbol of wisdom and Athena's consort. To the Native Americans, an omen of misfortune. In the case of Lilith, more reports of ne'er do welling.

But these were rather elementary sites in comparison to higher and (in my opinion) more authoritarian sources.

Heck - according to Wikipedia, Moloch was not an owl at all, but rather a BULL!

Guess that rather blows the Bohemian Grove theory out of the water, unless, of course - those guys are hanging out with that large owl as a symbol of wisdom...and even then, given human nature, I'm sure there might be a bit of discrepancies within members of the group between their own personal symbolic identifications and associations anyway.

Then again, maybe not - like I said, I'm still unaligned and no first hand evidence.

Can't verify it, never met the BG crowd (that I'm aware of ) but still - some patterns of human behavior transcend organizational alliegences.

But anyway - are symbols a gateway?

YES.

Is the path full of corridors leading off in several different directions in a sometimes confusing tangle?

Of course.

What matters more is what we take with us when we leave the maze, and our personal and unbiased viewpoints.

I for one, would hate my little owl collection to immediately disqualify me as a "decent person" just because of overwhelming negative propaganda out there...but, hey - that negative stuff you have to wade through is all part of the path and trials.

I recognize it for such, anyway - I hope there are more people who realize that just because someone has decreed something to be "evil" doesn't nessecarily make it Universal.

*two cents*

Thanks for your time, guys - great thread.

[edit on 29-8-2007 by GENERAL EYES]

maybe its like this:

the subconscious or sub-awareness part of us uses and understands the language of pictures and symbols. a certain symbol may have an effect on a part of us that we are not even aware of. certain meanings may be ingrained within us since thousands of years, and everytime we re-view that symbol something within us, beyond our intellectual awareness, is activated.

I am not a believer of the illuminati-conspiracy-theory, but I do find many things to be symbolically significant and not too obvious to the everyday eye. One example: while walking around london as a tourist, I notice how the financial district is guarded by stone dragons on each side, to "protect the money" so to speak. thats symbolically significant and certainly has a purpose (unlike the McDonalds-wrapper example).

reply to post by Skyfloating


I concur.

It's just saddening to me that sometimes works written by some faroff hand are given more credibility than our own personal insights into a symbol.

But then again, I'm fairly childlike in many respects, and the concept of "evil" is something I tend to regard with a cautious eye whenever possible.

Funny thing, dissention and bad rumors - they have a way of growing exponentially into some pretty terrible things sometimes.

I'm avoided like the plague where I live because of my symbolic associations, and all the various connotations out there - I miss being younger and having people ask me what my symbols meant instead of just hopping on the web and forming their own abstract conclusions.

But, a sign of the times and human experience on this plane of existence I suppose.

I dont mean to derail the topic but, i have to pose a question to all these anti-masonic mouthpieces. If Freemasonry is so evil, then why do they have a charity specifically to help those in need and the money is never even found to be connected to the masons (to the knowledge of those helped) ((I think it is called the Angel Charity ))?

Well give me a resonse to that one chaps

Originally posted by Karl7772000
I dont mean to derail the topic but, i have to pose a question to all these anti-masonic mouthpieces. If Freemasonry is so evil, then why do they have a charity specifically to help those in need and the money is never even found to be connected to the masons (to the knowledge of those helped) ((I think it is called the Angel Charity ))?

Well give me a resonse to that one chaps

Did you ever consider anything of the sort to be some sort of front?
A person or thing that serves as a cover or disguise for some other activity, esp. one of a secret, disreputable, or illegal nature; a blind: The store was a front for foreign agents. It seems only logical?


And I don't think that it is portrayed as so "Evil" I think the matter at hand here is secrecy, peoples minds tend to run amuck when secrets are transpired or they automatically think what tv has taught them to.
People attitudes seem to protest the secrecy behind masonry and that is all. Once the truth is learned they feel as dumb as I did lol.Many humans have been conditioned to see and believe in a limited perspective of smallness which in return shows in their attitudes.

But on a side note isnt it great how attitudes interpret things? I mean look at how your attitude made you question the mouth pieces its the same with people that only find out masonic lies and secrets from the www., then their attitude takes over and they start spewing only what therir feelings transpire knowledge is wonderful but then again is it correct ? and by whos assumption or proofs, this worlds a funny place where and it seems the bad are leading the blind these days, I Don't understand why there is so much secrecy but the more I read into the more I am starting not to care...

Originally posted by seridium
I Don't understand why there is so much secrecy but the more I read into the more I am starting not to care...

But see right there you fall into what you just referred to. I understand that you are not ignorant to what Masonry is, I think I can tell from your posts that you have done your homework on the subject.

The pure simple fact of the matter is that there is very little "secrecy" at all!

There is very little that I would not share with a seriously intersted individual, save what I have obligated myself not to divulge -- I know I'm being sort of contradictory here, but bear with me -- which is in truth very little.

So what we have is people who are not allowed to sit in our meetings, because they have not earned the right, taking what little actually IS private and making such a big fuss about it. It's not that everything is so secret.

Just because one is ignorant of a fact does not mean said fact is a secret.

I can tell you from personal experience - I knew ALOT about the fraternity before I ever joined, and it all came from diligent research and asking the right questions. ( I started at Freemasonry Watch, by the way... ) Ultimately what I found led me to join. To be honest, after all the build-up on this site and everyone always going on about Masonic secrets, I was a little disappointed when the time came for those "secrets" to be revealed to me. It's not a huge deal.

The huge deal with the "secrecy" is keeping one's word; and Masonry's biggest "secrets" are those in plain view, that one hides from oneself (Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. -- Matthew 13:13). You don't even need to be a Mason to find them.

[edit on 8/30/07 by The Axeman]

Well I admit im partially biased due to so many in my family have been or are Freemasons.


(apologize for the oneliner)

reply to post by The Axeman


Gotta agree with axeman on this one. I mean the only things my relatives wont tell me, seem to be things so abstract and pertaining only to spiritual/personal improvement (as far as i can tell). They could tell all the secrets and most wouldnt make any sense anyway since its not the secrets, but what they signify or how they relate to something that is,, sorry i dont know how to finish my thought XD, i hate when that happens but i think you get the gist of it.

Originally posted by The Axeman


The huge deal with the "secrecy" is keeping one's word; and Masonry's biggest "secrets" are those in plain view, that one hides from oneself (Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. -- Matthew 13:13). You don't even need to be a Mason to find them.

I was always under the impression that there are no secrets in Freemasonry I mean there are many pieces of literature and many writing about the cult for everyone to see The only beef I ever had was the 33 degrees which masons state there are only 3, but thats not my point.
What I do know is that the Ritual teaches a moral code and the only secrets that Masons keep are those designed to protect against the uninitiated discovering what goes on inside the Temple. You see, one of the joys of Freemasonry is the discovery of different parts of the allegorical tale which forms the basis of the ritual. It would be a shame for an initiate or candidate for a further degree to know what was going to happen next - it would somewhat ruin the point. Like the Blue Degrees

"The Blue Degrees are but the outer court or portico of the Temple. Part of the symbols are displayed there to the Initiate, but he is intentionally misled by false interpretations. It is not intended that he shall understand them; but it is intended that he shall imagine he understands them.- Their true explication is reserved for the Adepts, the Princes of Masonry."

There is much more to it all I am just too tired to type it all out, the only thing that makes Freemasonry evil as they say would be an individual not the org itself.

[edit on 053131p://upThursday by seridium]

Originally posted by seridium
I was always under the impression that there are no secrets in Freemasonry I mean there are many pieces of literature and many writing about the cult for everyone to see

The only beef I ever had was the 33 degrees which masons state there are only 3, but thats not my point.

True (all except for the cult part ). In all actuality, most if not all of the "secrets" like modes of recognition, obligations, etc. are readily available for those willing to search them out. But I have found that the ones we have troubles with here aren't interested in any of that - it would spoil their outlook and put to bed their notions of evil in the Craft. They don't want that; they want to feel like they are fighting evil, instead of just looking stupid, which is what usually happens. If they had to accept that they were wrong about Masonry, then they would have to go find another sandbox to bury their turds in, and who has the time for all that?

The ones who "get it" wouldn't want to read the ritual, for the very reason you specified. Maybe they might join later, and wouldn't want to spoil the experience. I found out quite enough before I was initiated and I never once looked at any ritual exposes or anything like that, despite my knowing right where to find them if I had wanted to.

What I do know is that the Ritual teaches a moral code and the only secrets that Masons keep are those designed to protect against the uninitiated discovering what goes on inside the Temple. You see, one of the joys of Freemasonry is the discovery of different parts of the allegorical tale which forms the basis of the ritual. It would be a shame for an initiate or candidate for a further degree to know what was going to happen next - it would somewhat ruin the point. Like the Blue Degrees.

True, but that's not all. There are secrets, but no one reveals them except the initiate; after sufficient contemplation of the symbol and it's possible connotations. That's what I'm getting at - the "secrets" are just things you find along the search for knowledge, or Light, that Masonry essentially is. The ritual serves as a sort of springboard for the initiate into self-study of a wide array of topics. What I mean is it sparks an interest in the candidate, who, more often than not, will go to searching around and looking for information about something that may have been briefly mentioned in the ritual. The more you study, the more you learn and understand, the more of the "secrets" you possess.

At least, that's one way to look at it.

"The Blue Degrees are but the outer court or portico of the Temple. Part of the symbols are displayed there to the Initiate, but he is intentionally misled by false interpretations. It is not intended that he shall understand them; but it is intended that he shall imagine he understands them.- Their true explication is reserved for the Adepts, the Princes of Masonry."

There is much more to it all I am just too tired to type it all out, the only thing that makes Freemasonry evil as they say would be an individual not the org itself.

Don't worry, I can probably save you the trouble; and yes of course it is the individual, not the institution, that is to blame when Masons go "off the reservation."

The problem lies in the accusations that are leveled because some people see it as "They do this or that because they are MASONS," not "they do this or that because they are MEN, and MEN are animals."

It brings me back to the same old example: Is a Mason a man first, then a Mason, or a Mason first, then a man? The answer is the former of the two, of course, but some seem to have a hard time making that distinction.

It is given to each man to decide for himself if he will be a good man or a wicked one. Masons are no different; it's just that the vast majority of us choose good, and the ones that choose wickedness do it in spite of the fraternity, not because of it.

Originally posted by seridium
The only beef I ever had was the 33 degrees which masons state there are only 3, but thats not my point.

This is a point that is misunderstood by many non-Masons. Ancient Craft Masonry has only three degrees: Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master Mason. The United Grand Lodge of England also includes Royal Arch as being annexed to the degree of Master Mason.

The 33 degrees you mention are the degrees of the Scottish Rite, not Ancient Craft Masonry. There are various Rites in existence that offer hundreds of various degrees to those who already Master Masons, the Scottish Rite being one of these.

It would be a shame for an initiate or candidate for a further degree to know what was going to happen next - it would somewhat ruin the point. Like the Blue Degrees

"The Blue Degrees are but the outer court or portico of the Temple. Part of the symbols are displayed there to the Initiate, but he is intentionally misled by false interpretations. It is not intended that he shall understand them; but it is intended that he shall imagine he understands them.- Their true explication is reserved for the Adepts, the Princes of Masonry."

Yet that particular Pike quote is rather invalid and outdated. It comes from Chapter 30 of Pike's "Morals and Dogma", which is the Lecture for the Scottish Rite 30°, called Knight Kadosh, a degree of Templary. That degree recounts the legend that the Templars founded Freemasonry, and that Masons are actually Templars in disguise. Originally, Pike believed the legend literally. Since the Blue Degrees do not mention the Templars, he thought the initiates there were being lied to about the fraternity's origins and goals, and that only the "elect", who proved themselves trustworthy, could be entrusted with the knowledge of Templary in the 30th degree.

However, Pike eventually changed his mind. When the English Masonic historian Robert Freke Gould publised his massive "History of Freemasonry", he laid to rest the Templar myth (even though some folks still publish pop history books trying to link Templary with Masonry to this very day). This sparked a correspondence between Pike and Gould, where Pike eventually conceded that he had been wrong, and that Gould was right. These letters are in the archives of the Supreme Council, and have been published by the Scottish Rite Research Society.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by seridium
The only beef I ever had was the 33 degrees which masons state there are only 3, but thats not my point.

This is a point that is misunderstood by many non-Masons. Ancient Craft Masonry has only three degrees: Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master Mason. The United Grand Lodge of England also includes Royal Arch as being annexed to the degree of Master Mason.

The 33 degrees you mention are the degrees of the Scottish Rite, not Ancient Craft Masonry. There are various Rites in existence that offer hundreds of various degrees to those who already Master Masons, the Scottish Rite being one of these.

See but what I misunderstand is this What is Freemasonry? is that different from a Mason isnt the scottish rite part fo being a Mason so how does Masonry say that there are not 33 degrees it's a riddle isnt it ?


[edit on 123131p://upFriday by seridium]

Originally posted by seridium



See but what I misunderstand is this What is Freemasonry? is that different from a Mason isnt the scottish rite part fo being a Mason so how does Masonry say that there are not 33 degrees it's a riddle isnt it

?

If you include the Scottish Rite, you would also have to include the York Rite, the Swedish Rite, the Egyptian Rite, the Oriental Rite, etc., etc. So you still wouldn't have 33 degrees....you'd have over a thousand!

The best way to explain this is to say that Ancient Craft Masonry has 3 degrees. A Third Degree Master Mason is a full member of the fraternity and has full rights and privileges.

After this, different Masons have created extra degrees in order to elaborate upon, and express certain teachings, in the first three. These extra degrees have been grouped into categories known as Rites. The Scottish Rite is a popular one, and has 33 degrees. But even a 33rd Degree Scottish Rite Mason, by holding that degree alone, will not hold the degrees in the other Rites. For example, a Scottish Rite Mason of the 33rd degree who is not a member of the York Rite cannot sit in a Chapter of Royal Arch Masons or a Commandery of Knights Templar. Nor can he sit in a Lodge of Royal Ark Mariners or a Conclave of the Secret Monitor because, even though he has the highest degree in the Scottish Rite, he hasn't in this case attained the degrees in the other Rites.